ITV3

"Brendan DJ Murphy" wrote in message
...
Don't confuse the arbitrary presentation numbers with the internal channel
identifiers.

Forgive me for asking, but what is an "internal channel identifier" and how
many are there?

Have we got to the stage when all transponders are full?


Brendan






As I understand it the problem is how many channels the OS can hold, recognise
and manipulate at any one time. There may be 999 channels allocated to the EPG
but the software can only handle a little over 500(?).
Typical short term thinking when designing the hardware that would support the
software running the services, either that or they truly never expected the system to
need this capacity or they never planned for the standard spec digibox to still be in use.
and with the limits it imposes.

Transponder capacity on SES and Eutelsat birds is nowhere near full and will no doubt
expand further when higher capacity/more powerful satellites are added or replace the
existing ones that SKY use.


Mike C

In message , Jomtien
writes
Nigel Barker wrote:

Are you sure? I assumed that the person who posted that information
was making a
joke. As far as I can see there are plenty of slots e.g. 108, 114, 119, 120,
122, 123. Not to mention dozens either side of ITV2 on 175.

One is led to believe that it isn't the number of holes that counts,
it is the digibox's ability to store more numbers.

Here are a few ideas to free up channel numbers for Sky:

put all the Box Office channels under the, erm, Box Office button on the
remote control instead of giving each its own channel number. And add a
feature that would list films by start time or alphabetic order;

be nice to the BBC, and perhaps an agreement to make the BBC regions
available via the red button could be made;

drop all the channel numbers for the +1 hour channels, and make them
available via their parent;

I'm tempted to suggest putting all the radio stations under an
interactive menu, but I suspect that would be unwelcome here.

Another alternative would be to give everyone Sky+. There would then be
no excuse for channels to repeat the same programme so many times within
a few days or weeks, so we would need fewer of them.

Or allow customers to set up their own EPG, thus dumping direct access
to the channels they don't want.

I think with DSL and digital hard drive recorders we will at some time
begin to move away from the concept of TV channels, and will view
programmes from "content providers" instead.
--
Martin Jay

Martin Jay wrote:

Or allow customers to set up their own EPG, thus dumping direct access
to the channels they don't want.

This would get my vote.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/yvnsy
How to get UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
Fed up with logos / red buttons? : http://logofreetv.org/
BBC gone? : http://www.astra2d.co.uk/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:14:07 +0100, Martin Jay
wrote:


Here are a few ideas to free up channel numbers for Sky:

....


Or allow customers to set up their own EPG, thus dumping direct access
to the channels they don't want

This doesn't work as the channels are still there taking up space
--
Gwyn.
**spam trap** remove rem if replying

In message , gwyn
writes
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:14:07 +0100, Martin Jay
wrote:

Here are a few ideas to free up channel numbers for Sky:

Or allow customers to set up their own EPG, thus dumping direct access
to the channels they don't want

This doesn't work as the channels are still there taking up space

That was a late response.

Anyway, it's been suggested that the Sky boxes can only handle a certain
number of channels, which is less that the 1,000 a three digit numbering
system can cope with (000 to 999).

Few subscribers probably watch all the channels, so allowing viewers to
program their box to 'forget' about ones they're not interested in may
free up some space.

Unfortunately I don't think Sky will pass control of the EPG numbering
system into the hands of viewers.
--
Martin Jay

I thought ITV 3 was only on Freeview


"Martin Jay" wrote in message
...
In message , gwyn
writes
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:14:07 +0100, Martin Jay
wrote:

Here are a few ideas to free up channel numbers for Sky:

Or allow customers to set up their own EPG, thus dumping direct access
to the channels they don't want

This doesn't work as the channels are still there taking up space

That was a late response.

Anyway, it's been suggested that the Sky boxes can only handle a certain
number of channels, which is less that the 1,000 a three digit numbering
system can cope with (000 to 999).

Few subscribers probably watch all the channels, so allowing viewers to
program their box to 'forget' about ones they're not interested in may
free up some space.

Unfortunately I don't think Sky will pass control of the EPG numbering
system into the hands of viewers.
--
Martin Jay

In message , any1
writes
I thought ITV 3 was only on Freeview

It was suggested earlier in the thread that one of the reasons for
ITV3's absence may be lack of space on Sky's EPG.

I note that in the 'ITV DSat testing prompts ITV3 speculation' thread,
see Message-ID: , there's speculation
that ITV3 may be available via digital satellite at launch after all.
Part of a Sky package; I wonder?
--
Martin Jay